Energy Efficiency Financing

  • 310 views
Uploaded on

 

  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
    Be the first to like this
No Downloads

Views

Total Views
310
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0

Actions

Shares
Downloads
5
Comments
0
Likes
0

Embeds 0

No embeds

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
    No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. OVERVIEW ENERGY EFFICIENCY FINANCING AND THE THREE COUNTRY ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROJECT New or improved programs to better capture the enormous potential for energy savings in existing industries and buildings in the developing world have important roles to play for the environment and for economic development. Many thousands of energy effi ciency projects with strong fi nancial rates of return remain unimplemented in the world at large, but especially in developing countries and emerging markets. The essential issue blocking the realization of the potential energy savings is the underdeveloped state of energy effi ciency investment delivery mechanisms, adapted to be able to work well in national and local economic environments. Traditional investment delivery mechanisms operated by local banks and other fi nancing organizations often have played useful roles in the energy effi ciency business, but still only a fraction of the potential has been tapped. Renewed and strong efforts are required to develop fi nancing programs that can combine effective technical project development with fi nancial products appropriate for dispersed investments, with benefi ts focused on operating cost savings. Many programs in recent years have aimed to develop such deli very mechanisms. Some have succeeded and some have failed. Given the urgent need to mobilize large levels of investments in energy effi ciency to help meet future energy requirements, this book evaluates the experience of past efforts, attempts to summarize lessons learned, and provides suggestions on how these lessons may be applied in the future. The book concentrates on Brazil, China, and India, but also includes reviews of selected experiences in other countries. This book draws extensively on the experiences of the UNEP-World Bank multiyear, technical assistance effort, “Developing Financial Intermediation Mechanisms for Energy Effi ciency Projects in Brazil, China, and India” (also known as the Three Country Energy Effi ciency Project), funded by the UNF and ESMAP. The purpose of this project was to generate new ideas and approaches for developing energy effi - ciency fi nancing schemes, which then could be tried out by local institutions, with support from the World Bank and other international agencies and donors where necessary. Core groups of represen tatives from both the fi nancing and energy effi ciency development commu nities in each of the three countries implemented project activities. Energy effi ciency and banking industry practitioners from each country also met in four formal cross-exchange workshops, and various informal meetings, to exchange lessons learned and ideas. This book attempts to synthesize the considerable practical knowledge generated from the project, which is applicable across countries, together with additional knowledge from other World Bank Group and donor efforts in other countries. Following an introduction in chapter 1, chapter 2 summarizes the overall energy effi ciency terrain and identifi es the opportunities at which the recommendations of this book are directed. Chapter 3 explores the origins and persistence of energy ineffi ciency. Chapter 4 provides a framework for thinking about the basic organizational and institutional challenges and the basic types of energy effi ciency investment mechanisms, and begins the discussion of the various mechanisms that have been used to meet these challenges. Chapter 5
  • 2. discusses the need that all such investment mechanisms have for market identifi cation and outreach, project development, and technical assessment of energy effi ciency projects. Options are laid out for developing and incorporating needed local technical capacity within investment delivery mechanisms. Chapter 6 deals with arranging the fi nancing fl ows that all investment mechanisms require, the issues involved, and the available options for fi nancing. Chapter 7 summarizes experience with the development and operation of a range of energy effi ciency investment mechanisms, and some of the lessons learned from that experience. Chapter 8 provides some basic conclusions, including advice from the study team concerning each of the three countries’ needs for strategic government support of the energy effi ciency agenda and about the roles of international fi nancial institutions, as well as some operational suggestions for those countries and organizations considering new energy effi ciency fi nancing programs. Part II of the book provides 13 case studies of different types of energy effi ciency fi nancing mechanisms that have been implemented in China, Hungary, Romania, India, Lithuania, the United States, Canada, Brazil, and Sri Lanka. The case studies describe advantages and disadvantages of the different approaches adopted, and specifi c lessons learned. They provide a platform for presentation of the synthesized conclusions in the main report. THE NEED FOR ENERGY EFFICIENCY INVESTMENT FINANCING INTERVENTIONS The critical importance of improving energy effi ciency globally, but especially in rapidly growing developing countries such as China, India, and Brazil, is well documented in other analyses. IEA’s World Energy Outlook 2006 forecasts in its reference scenario a 53 percent increase in global energy demand with matching large increases in carbon dioxide emissions between 2004 and 2030 (IEA 2006b). China, India, and Brazil represent three of the top 10 energy consuming nations in the world now, and their share in total consumption will certainly increase. In the world as a whole, but especially in these rapidly growing developing countries, effi ciency improvements to generate more economic output with less energy input is essential for reasons of energy supply security, economic competitiveness, improvement in livelihoods, and environmental sustainability. In an Alternative Policy Scenario, developed to investigate how more sustainable global energy supply and use might be developed by 2030, the IEA estimates that two-thirds of the hoped for carbon dioxide emission reductions in developing countries must come from improved energy effi ciency, and the balance from changes in the mix of energy supply technologies. To consider, specifi cally, how to achieve energy effi ciency gains, the overall “energy effi ciency terrain” must be dissected, as different aspects of the problem must be addressed in very different ways. At a basic level, reduction in energy use per unit of economic output can be achieved in two ways—through energy savings stemming from changes in economic structure, and through energy savings stemming from technical effi ciency gains. Structural energy savings are the result of broad trends in economic development (for example, changes in sources of industrial value added) and are not very amenable to direct policy infl uence. Specifi c energy effi ciency policies and programs, therefore, usually focus on achievement of technical savings— reducing energy use per unit of physical output, not output value. When looking at technical energy savings potential, it is useful to
  • 3. separately consider new facilities and existing facilities. Improving technical energy effi ciency in new facilities is especially important over the longer term, and especially in fast-growing economies. However, individual investors who build new power plants, transport systems, industrial capacity, or buildings must weigh many factors in deciding on technology and designs, and energy effi ciency is only one factor—and often a minor one to them. The challenge for governments in this case is to infl uence the broad technology choice decisions of investors and encourage them to adopt energy effi ciency solutions. The main tools that governments can use to intervene here are policy and regulatory tools. When reviewing how to improve energy effi ciency in existing facilities, it is important to further distinguish among different markets and types of projects to decide the most appropriate ways to intervene. Often, major energy effi ciency gains can be achieved through investment in broad restructuring projects—to revamp entire production processes in industrial enterprises, or modernize urban transportation systems, for example. In these cases, too, energy effi ciency is only one of many factors involved in the selection of technologies by investors and the tools available to promote energy effi ciency are again primarily policy and regulatory tools aimed at infl uencing those choices. In other cases, however, there are specifi c projects aimed at just improving energy effi ciency—by replacing outdated boilers, utilizing wasted heat or industrial gases, or installing more effi cient electrical equipment, for example. Here, development and fi nancing of specifi c energy effi ciency investment projects is required. This book considers solutions for expanding investment in specifi c investment projects where the primary objective is to achieve energy savings. These investments represent only a piece of the overall required effort to improve energy effi ciency, but it is the piece most amenable to specifi c energy effi ciency investment interventions, as opposed to policy and regulatory actions. This book focuses on how to expand investment in the thousands of energy effi ciency projects dispersed through economies, rather than those concentrated in a few very large companies, such as energy supply utilities. Energy saving opportunities can be found in existing industries and buildings of all types, in projects that typically range from US$50,000 to US$5 million in size. As documented in many other studies, a wealth of such “standard” energy effi ciency investment projects remains unimplemented, especially in Brazil, China, and India, despite high fi nancial rates of return and payback periods between one and fi ve years (with many in the one- to two-year range). Capturing these project opportunities, which are often winners from the perspective of enterprises, investors, and society at large, has long been an attractive target. However, success has been elusive. Success in capturing a bigger share of the large numbers of fi nancially attractive energy effi ciency retrofi t projects has proven stubbornly diffi cult, primarily because the intrinsic nature of the projects and their broader setting make it hard for effective markets to develop naturally. In some countries, price distortions may undermine incentives, but in most sectors in Brazil, China, and India, and many other countries, this is not the case, as project fi nancial returns are high in most instances. Flow of information about energy effi ciency opportunities is far from perfect, but it has improved. In some countries, the required technical or managerial expertise is lacking, but in the case of Brazil, China, and India the issue is more how to bring existing
  • 4. strong expertise to bear. Rather, the core of the problem in these and many countries lies in the intertwined problems of perceived high risk driving up implicit discount rates associated with projects, currently high transaction costs, and diffi culties in structuring workable contracts for pre paring, fi nancing, and implementing energy effi ciency investments. With their main fi nancial benefi ts focused on savings of energy costs, these cost-saving projects rarely rank as equals with projects to expand production or capture new markets, especially in rapidly growing economies. Benefi ts in the form of calculated costs savings streams, as opposed tohighly visible new production assets, appear as nebulous and inherently more risky to many. As project opportunities tend to be relatively small scale and dispersed, transaction costs can prove daunting unless mechanisms are put in place to take advantage of similarities among projects and bundle them. Some form of fi nancial intermediation is usually required, unless enterprises use their own funds. Typically, therefore, implementation of energy effi ciency projects involves interaction of both fi nancing entities and technical experts with clients. Project delivery requires very effi cient contracting to achieve this without driving up transactions costs—a challenge in any country, but especially where market institutions may be relatively weak, causing greater insecurities in contracting, as in Brazil, China, and India. This poses two challenges for energy effi ciency project developers. The fi rst is to develop means to design, package, and fi nance energy effi ciency investment projects effi ciently, in ways which can overcome such problems in different local in-country settings. The second is to have those projects nudge forward changes in the local economic (insti tutional) environment so that energy effi ciency investments arise spontaneously in the future—in other words, to “create” markets or to make markets for energy effi ciency investment more “complete.” Expe rience shows that these two processes seldom happen naturally at levels corresponding to more than a small fraction of the potential. Specifi c, customized efforts are required to develop investment delivery mechanisms that can operate sus tainably in local markets and that can help expand local markets for various aspects of energy effi ciency delivery services. This, then, is the primary focus of the agenda to expand uptake of fi nancially viable energy effi ciency investment projects. DELIVERY OF ENERGY EFFICIENCY FINANCING IS AN INSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT ISSUE Development and operation of energy effi ciency investment delivery mechanisms is an institutional development issue, and energy effi ciency fi nancing programs and projects must recognize this clearly. Lack of domestic sources of capital is rarely the true barrier; inadequate organizational and institutional systems for developing projects and accessing funds are actually the main problem. Therefore, mechanisms to capture the opportunities for energy effi ciency investment need to be created or strengthened. This entails sustained efforts over years—new institutional constructs cannot be expected to develop and grow overnight. Clearly, energy effi ciency investment delivery systems must fi t local institutional environments in order to be effective. This book fi nds that delivery systems developed in one institutional environment in one country often do not work effectively in a different institutional context. For success, local institutional environments must be well understood, and general solutions usually need to be at least partly
  • 5. customized for those environments. Further, all energy effi ciency fi nancing mechanisms must successfully incorporate two functions: (i) a marketing, project development, and technical design function to effi ciently package good projects; and (ii) a fi nancing function. This book fi nds that a second common source of program failure is inadequate balance between these two functions, leading to insuffi cient project pipeline development to meet the needs of fi nanciers, or inability to arrange and deliver fi nancing for a series of well-developed projects. Both functions are discussed below, and in separate chapters of Part I. Third, there must be suffi cient incentives for the various players in a given energy effi ciency investment delivery mechanism to undertake the functions expected. Again, while this seems like common sense, such incentives are at times diffi cult to achieve, given the variety of contractual arrangements that can be dictated by differences among local institutional environments. (The conceptual model presented in chapter 4 is targeted at these three fundamental requirements.) Generally speaking, there are three basic types of investment delivery mechanisms for energy effi ciency investment projects that have been popular in recent years: • Loan fi nancing schemes and partial loan guarantee schemes. These operate either within the commercial banking system or as specialized development agencies or revolving funds. • Use of energy service companies (ESCOs). In this book, ESCOs are defi ned to include any company using energy performance contracting as part of energy effi ciency investment transactions. An energy performance contract (EPC) in the ESCO business may be broadly defi ned as a contract between an ESCO and its client, involving an energy effi ciency investment in the client’s facilities, the performance of which is somehow guaranteed by the ESCO, with fi nancial consequences for the ESCO. • Utility demand-side management (DSM) programs. In DSM programs, energy distribution utilities organize all aspects of energy effi ciency delivery, including fi nancing, technical development, and interface with users. It is common, also, to mix these mechanisms. DELIVERING INVESTMENT PROJECT DESIGNS AND TECHNICAL APPRAISALS For energy effi ciency investments to be made, energy effi ciency conce pts must be marketed to enterprises, and specifi c projects must be identifi ed, designed, and appraised. This requires marketing, project development, and technical assessment skill, typically provided by local energy effi ciency experts. Human and organizational capacity is needed to defi ne target markets and market outreach strategies, identify project opportunities, design appropriate project packages at end-user facilities, assess fi nancial returns and the risks infl uencing delivery of the project cost savings cash fl ow, and understand the ince ntives to participate by each of the designated parties. Early assessment of potential markets is important when developing energy effi ciency delivery programs because different markets require different approaches. Selection of market segments for concentration will defi ne organizational arrangements for technical work and the types of fi nancial products developed. In addition, different stakeholders may have very different interests in market development strategies: one bank may be interested primarily in developing new small and medium-size enterprise (SME) clients, while another
  • 6. may be primarily interested in providing new services to existing large commercial customers. Once target markets are defi ned, market outreach and marketing of project concepts needs to be conducted, followed by project development. Project development includes a series of key tasks including technical assessments, initial project identifi cation and screening, customer enlistment and their acceptance of proposed project concepts, detailed design of project components, calculation of project economics, and identifi cation and allocation of project risks. Capacity to undertake project development work typically is found within project appraisal companies, energy survey and auditing fi rms, university or research institute departments, industry associations, equipment vendors, or ESCOs. In Brazil, China, and India, existing local capacity in the energy effi ciency industry is fairly strong. In countries where local capacity is weak, development of this capacity then becomes a top priority—even a prerequisite—for energy effi ciency project development. At times, capacity might be borrowed from nei ghboring countries, but experience has shown that excessive reliance on international consultants is generally unsustainable. For countries such as Brazil, China, and India, the main issue is how to most effi ciently access existing project development capacity. Almost always, both fi nanciers and end users require some degree of independent assessment. For example, where a trusted ESCO might be able to fully meet the needs of both parties, usually the fi nancier or the end user still wish to have some level of independent technical assessment. Choices then need to be made concerning the degree of outsourcing. Among end users, major industrial enterprises often may conduct technical assessments largely in-house, with perhaps only some very specialized expertise acquired from outside. Building owners, on the other hand, usually outsource nearly all of the project development and assessment effort. The situation among fi nanciers also varies: some development fi nance institutions (DFIs) may have quite sophisticated in-house technical assessment capacity, whereas many commercial banks will contract out such work to trusted partners. In all cases, energy effi ciency investment fi nancing mechanisms must include effi cient and cost-effective organizational and institutional arrangements for delivering marketing and technical assessment requirements in which incentives of all the parties are properly aligned. In each respective economic environment, this is likely to include differing combinations of in-house expertise and outsourcing arrangements. Two points are worth special attention: • The evolution of different available project development groups is often a critical factor determining their immediate effectiveness in a given energy effi ciency fi nancing scheme. Such groups typically have complex historical and staffi ng relationships that heavily impact their effectiveness as contractors for different fi nanciers or end users, especially in developing countries. • Keeping transaction costs reasonable is often a major challenge, especially given the relatively small size of energy effi ciency loans. Design of programs to achieve this requires creativity and innovation. For example, for their general and energy effi ciency lending to SMEs, Indian banks have relied on new geographical and industry-specifi c clustering approaches. DELIVERING FINANCING
  • 7. The main in-country options for fi nancing energy effi ciency investment projects include the internal resources of end users and outside sources of fi nance such as local banks (including local branches of international banks), leasing companies, and other nonbank fi nancial institutions. ESCOs may provide fi nancing to end users, but then they also will require fi nancing from others. Other occasional sources include export credits, equity capital fi nancing through special-purpose companies, fi nancing from utilities repaid through energy bills, or informal sources. Multilateral development banks may provide direct fi nancing to especially large end users such as utilities, but otherwise fi nancing from these banks is usually channeled through local intermediaries. Despite the variety of sources for fi nancing energy effi ciency projects, it is clear that ultimately the key source of sustainable and sizable fl ows of fi nance in most countries is the local banking sector. Although circumstances do vary considerably, the following observations hold true in many cases and are important in how banks tend to view the kinds of energy effi ciency investment projects that are the primary focus of this book: • Energy effi ciency projects often represent a relatively small niche business for major banks. • Project fi nance for projects targeting operating cost savings is nonconventional. Most lending in Brazil, India, and China is for working capital, and if project fi nance is available, it is usually only offered for large projects focusing on capacity expansion. Term lending for projects to improve business effi ciency and increase productivity is less common. • Banks lack knowledge of energy effi ciency technology, and (reasonably) consider such specialized knowledge outside of the scope of their operational interest. • Existing procedural frameworks within banks vary and banks are reluctant to alter them. To be operationalized effectively, new lines of business must be fi t into existing systems. • Customer relations are important, and the strategies of banks to attract and retain customers often dictate areas of interest in new business lines. • Transaction costs for small and/or non-replicable projects are often a key issue. In some countries, the local banking sector may be close to dysfunctional, the policy environment may be distorted, or the sector may be in the midst of major transitory reforms, making it diffi cult to use local banks for fi nancial intermediation. Developing energy effi - ciency fi n a n cing efforts may then involve diffi cult choices between incurring high risks of working in an immature banking sector, developing independent solutions, or foregoing the opportunity to achieve energy savings. If the program intervention is to proceed, especially with an independent approach, the high risks and needs for intensive efforts during implementation, including fl exibility to adopt major midcourse corrections, should be recognized up front. In many cases, energy effi ciency projects can be attractively fi nanced using existing bank loan products, without special adjustments or development of new fi nancial products. However, modifi cations of fi nancial products to match the characteristics of energy effi ciency projects can help expand the market for such loans and increase uptake of fi nancially viable yet unimplemented projects. The main direction for developing more customized fi nancial products is to deve lop mechanisms that recognize and defi ne the cost-reduction
  • 8. cash fl ow benefi ts of the projects and use this fl ow of funds as a source of loan repayment and security. The key is for fi nanciers to increasingly recognize the characteristics of the cash stream generated by the projects fi nanced and to structure loans and repayment assurances to best take advantage of that stream. There is an art to developing such enhancements and modifi cations of existing primary loan products. Some of the special tools used by fi nanciers to partially mitigate repayment risks from borrowers for energy effi ciency projects, using the generated project cash fl ows, include the following: • matching loan repayment schedules to project cost-saving cash fl ow • use of escrow accounts for loan repayment, into which borrowers deposit cash from energy cost savings • use of energy effi ciency performance guarantees provided by third parties such as ESCOs • use of ESCOs as project aggregators • arranging for loan repayments to be made through utility bills • development of build-own-operate or build-operate-transfer cogeneration projects under chauffage contracts. MAKING INTEGRATED MECHANISMS WORK For investment delivery mechanisms integrating project development and fi nancing to be successful in increasing energy effi ciency project investment, they should build upon the following principles: • Delivery mechanisms need to be customized, based on a careful diagnostic review of the local institutional environment, including the fi nancial sector, local capacities for technical assessment, the energy effi ciency market, and the role of government. Such diagnostic review critically requires local expertise. • End users should face commercial terms for the fi nancing and technical services being provided as the best foundation for the creation of a sustainable energy effi ciency market. End-user subsidies tend to ultimately undermine sustainable market development, because they are usually short-lived and can create market distortions and unrealistic expectations. However, concessional fi nancing has often proven valuable to help buy down the high costs and risks of starting up new commercially oriented programs, build necessary new capacity, and assume risks with new approaches. • Appropriate incentives must be included for the various actors in each mechanism to participate. Particularly important are incentives to generate deal fl ow. Combined with the previous bullet, this implies a focus upon organizational and institutional arrangements (“deal structuring”) that deliver positive incentives for all actors without relying upon long-term market-distorting subsidies. Suggestions resulting from operational experience with the main types of energy effi ciency investment delivery mechanisms are summarized below. Energy effi ciency lending through local commercial banks offers the highest prospect of program sustainability and large-scale impact. Experience suggests the following approaches: • Design of major operations might best begin with partnerships with the fi nancial intermediaries, and cater to their business approach and market development strategies. The fi nancial intermediaries should select the operational arrangements for project development and technical assessment that best meet their needs
  • 9. and match their business preferences. • Not all banks are likely to be interested in promoting energy effi - ciency projects as a specifi c line of business. However, an energy effi ciency lending business may be useful for some as a means to achieve broader strategic goals. Some banks may be interested in developing such products geared to enhancing productivity as an extra service for existing good customers. Others may use energy effi ciency loan products as a tool for entering or strengthening the bank’s position in specifi c markets or business lines, such as the SME market or medium-term maturity lending to large industries. • Integration of operational arrangements for technical assessment work with the fi nancial intermediation of the banks is essential. Development and control of these arrangements would preferably be led by the banks. Partial-risk loan guarantee programs supported by international fi nancial institutions have shown some success in recent years in jump-starting energy effi ciency fi nancing programs through local fi na ncial institutions. This instrument is designed to defray part of the risks of loan repayment for energy effi ciency loans. Such risks are often perceived initially to be high by local banks that are unfamiliar with energy effi ciency business concepts or specialized means to mitigate those risks. The instrument also may provide a useful platform for delivery of a broad package of assistance to fi nancial intermediaries. However, loan guarantee programs are not a broad panacea that can solve all the diffi culties faced in efforts to expand energy effi ciency investment. World Bank Group experience has shown that loan guarantees are especially useful where the banking system functions fairly well and the fundamental conditions that would allow energy effi ciency lending to prosper are already in place. Recent World Bank energy effi ciency investment loan guarantee programs developed in Hungary and China show quite different approaches, although both have met with success so far. The use of DFIs and special revolving funds is another common approach. An advantage is that DFIs and special loan funds can be designed as “one-stop shops,” combining fi nancial intermediation with strong project development functions, as the institutions have a dedicated, specialized purpose. In some cases where the local fi nancial sector is under stress or in the midst of transitional reforms and restructuring, setting up special entities dedicated to energy effi ciency lending may be the only way to establish funding channels. Their separation from the banking sector, however, also carries major disadvantages and major risks. DFIs are often established to act as catalyzing agents to pioneer the new business and help develop take-up by commercial banks, but this can create additional, diffi cult operational challenges. In some cases, especially with special revolving funds that have been added as components to bigger projects, capacities to deal appropriately with the details of proper credit evaluation and loan processing are often insuffi cient. ESCOs can be an important market-based mechanism involved in the delivery of energy effi ciency investment. ESCOs that provide fi nancing to clients may be viewed as a partial fi nancing mechanism for energy effi ciency investment, operating at the retail level. These ESCOs serve as project aggregators, to which fi nancial institutions may provide fi nancing for a package of projects, thereby reducing their own direct involvement with end users. The mixed experience with
  • 10. ESCOs in developing countries suggests the following lessons: • The ESCO model is not a magic bullet and does not solve basic problems of delivering energy effi ciency project fi nancing. Even when ESCOs provide fi nancing to clients, the ability of the ESCOs themselves to obtain project fi nance is a central, diffi cult issue. The success achieved with ESCOs to date in China shows new ESCOs can play an important role if local institutional environments are suitable, but ESCO industry start-up is very complex, requiring complex contractual arrangements, staff with technical and fi nancial and business experience, access to funding, and so forth. • Long-term fi nancing of ESCOs should be considered up front in any serious effort to promote local ESCO businesses. Programs that provide only technical assistance to build ESCO capacity alone have not proven very helpful in delivering large-scale sustainable impacts. • Active government support for ESCO development is critical, especially in the early stages, as experience from both North America and China shows. This may include direct strategic support and/or assistance through market creation. • The choice of ESCO business model should be determined by the local market, especially the choice between shared savings or guaranteed savings energy performance contracts. For some ESCO clients, such as building or commercial facility owners with little knowledge of energy saving technologies and their operation, the guarantee of energy savings may be very important. Clients in industrial facilities, on the other hand, may be very knowledgeable about energy savings of different investments and instead be interested in off-balance-sheet fi nancing through ESCOs. Utility DSM Programs. Although DSM programs were not one of the topics explicitly covered under the Three Country Energy Effi ciency Project, these programs do represent another important option for promoting energy effi ciency investments. DSM programs rely on the fi na ncial, organizational, and technical strength of major utilities to deliver numerous small-scale energy effi ciency investments, using the relationships of utilities with consumers. In principle, the combination of delivery of energy effi ciency together with delivery of energy supply would result in providing energy services as effi ciently as possible. However, energy effi ciency per se runs counter to the general business interests of supply utilities, since a kilowatt-hour saved is a lost sale and reduced revenue. Thus, government or industry regulators usually must provide special incentives to utilities to pursue such programs when the programs have the effect of cutting the utilities’ revenues. Such regulation is diffi cult to undertake effi ciently, especially in developing countries and emerging market economies. Under these circumstances, utility DSM programs may best be promoted only (i) where the utility industry is relatively responsive to public sector mandates; (ii) when energy effi ciency efforts are combined with powerfactor correction or load-management efforts that are in the fi nancial interests of the utility; and/or (iii) in certain cases where promotion of energy effi ciency may provide major benefi ts to the utility, such as expanding its customer base or reducing sales to customers whose tariff is lower than the cost of service. MOVING AHEAD One clear message from the experience of the Three Country Energy Effi ciency Project is the importance of establishing and maintaining practical, operationally focused dialogue between the banking community
  • 11. and the energy effi ciency practitioner community. This dialogue helped generate new energy effi ciency lending programs in a number of Indian banks, laid a platform for the proposed development of a new energy effi ciency fi nancing initiative with major Chinese banks with World Bank support, and fostered the development of a new ESCO loan guarantee program in Brazil. Each country hopes to continue to build upon the platforms created after the close of this project. Another clear conclusion is the central importance of strategic government support to more aggressively promote new energy effi ciency fi nancing mechanisms in each of these three countries. China’s government has set an ambitious target to reduce energy use per unit of GDP by 20 percent during 2006 to 2010—and the challenge for the government is to mobilize effective implementation measures across the energy effi ciency terrain. In Brazil and India, the study team recommends new, strategic reviews at the national level to consider medium- and long-term strategic priorities to improve energy effi - ciency. In the area of energy effi ciency investment fi nancing, a number of promising concepts have been developed in these countries, and it is important for the central governments to use their convening power and certain strategically focused but sustained institutional development support to enable new concepts to gain stronger operational footholds and to scale up initial experiences. Well-targeted support from international fi nancial institutions (IFIs) also can play an important role. The ability of IFIs to combine investment fi nancing and project development support in multiyear packages is important in order to not just plan and train, but to implement promising new ideas. The IFIs also are able in principle to maintain a sustained presence, which is necessary to provide continuing support for new operational mechanisms from the design stage, through development and start-up, and fi nally operational rollout. However, because the problem to be solved is lack of adequate delivery systems for energy effi ciency investment, and not lack of in-country capital, the success of IFIs should be measured in terms of energy effi ciency results where possible, and not volumes of IFI lending, which is not directly relevant. Project support from the Global Environment Facility (GEF) for commercially based energy effi ciency fi nancing programs has been especially critical and benefi cial over the last decade. When introducing and developing new mechanisms, GEF grant fi nancing for technical assistance and for investment support has been a critical tool—for trying new pilot projects, for covering part of the initially high transaction costs of schemes, and especially for helping defray initial risks. Continued strong support from the GEF can make a very big difference to the rate of success of developing and emerging market countries in this area in the coming years. The authors hope that the analytical framework provided in this book and details concerning project implementation experience will be a useful contribution to countries considering development of specifi c new projects. Summarizing, the three biggest causes of operational failures in energy effi ciency fi nancing projects are (i) mismatches between the solutions attempted and local institutional environments; (ii) lack of proper balance between development of fi nancial intermediation functions and project development functions; and (iii) lack of sustained effort and follow through, especially for adjusting institutional mechanisms and approaches during implementation
  • 12. in response to market changes or arising operational ineffi ciencies. To avoid these mistakes and to direct concerted efforts to achieve the best results possible in the future, the study team has the following broad suggestions: • Careful diagnostic work on existing in-country conditions should form the basis for project design and interventions that fi t within local institutional contexts. • For projects involving fi nancial intermediation, parallel attention is strongly recommended to (i) the details of developing capacities and mechanisms for fi nancial intermediation, and (ii) project pipeline development and technical appraisal. • It is important to incorporate periodic review and fl exibility within the project design, so that programs can be adjusted during implementation. • All of the above result in exceptionally high labor intensity for program management, operation, and technical support, not only during preparation but also during program implementation. High-quality and concentrated attention from program management and expert personnel is essential for new institutional mechanisms to be nurtured to success. Energy effi ciency fi nancing operations are relatively costly and time-consuming to develop and implement. Development of the associated new institutional mechanisms requires intensive, multiyear efforts. If it is not possible to organize such efforts, it may be best to not attempt such ambitious programs. However, where possible, these programs can make a major, positive difference. With strong returns in terms of fi nancial benefi ts to enterprises and energy consumers, and with very high potential returns per unit of public investment in environmental and energy security benefi ts to countries, further development of fi nancing delivery mechanisms for sustainable energy effi - ciency undoubtedly has a major role to play in mitigating the energy development and climate change challenges of the future.